GeoAtreides

introspection and rumination are two different things

no conditions! what, you didn't know your content would be free for LITERALLY EVERYONE when you made your account? and that you can't delete your comments? and it's a free for all? well, that's on you buddy, not HN, definitely not HN in any way

>Anubis was enabled in the tar pit at difficulty 1 (lowest setting) when requests were pouring in 24/7

>difficulty 1 (lowest setting)

literally in the comment you're responding to

there is nothing contradictory in what i said, and if you weren't favoring a very literal interpretation of my argument you would agree.

but, in the spirit of critical reading education, what i meant is: human attention good, machine ingestion bad.

your ability to not address my argument main point is something to behold. can't tell if you're doing on purpose or not.

if humans read my blog posts and then things without credit that would be fine. i like human eyeballs and i like them on my content. that's exactly the purpose of the blog post (_in this particular example_), to get human eyeballs on the content.

>It's less proof of work and just annoying to users, and feel good to whoever added it to their site,

this is being disproved in the article posted:

>And so Anubis was enabled in the tar pit at difficulty 1 (lowest setting) when requests were pouring in 24/7. Before it was enabled, it was getting several hundred-thousand requests each day. As soon as Anubis became active in there, it decreased to about 11 requests after 24 hours, most just from curious humans.

apparently it does more than annoying users and making the site owner feel good (well, i suppose effective bot blocking would make the site owner feel quite good)

oh man.

my comment was about the very human need to be recognized for something created, made, or thought by a person. People are ok with writing blog posts, they're ok with writing software, and they're ok with give it all for free, but they want their name attached and their contribution recognized.

i'm curious, do you honestly think the argument was about recipes and cookies? maybe it was an analogy? looking back up the comment tree, it does seem to be an analogy, not a discussion about ACTUAL cookies and ACTUAL recipes.

how about this analogy: I created a most tasty cookie recipe. I give it out for free, and all copies have my name because I am vain person who likes to be known far and wide as the best baking chef ever. Is it ok to get the recipe, remove my name, and write in LLM-Codex as the creator? again, i'm ok with giving the recipe for free, i just want my name out there.

but I don't want a $600 amazing laptop, i want a powerful desktop x86 machine with loads of ram and disk space. As cheap as it was a couple of years ago.

ah yes, capitalism is over because the chinese are benevolent people that just give away the goose that lays golden eggs out of the goodness of their hearts

this will continue forever and no rugs, chinese or otherwise, will ever be pulled

we know that because the label on the rug says "open source"

Nobody argued how many people died during the Industrial Revolution or before; quality of life, on the other hand...

That being said.

You cite a study implying (you, not the study) the Industrial Revolution was what lead to lower death rates, so it's all good.

But that's not what the study says:

> These patterns are better explained by changes in breastfeeding practices and the prevalence or virulence of particular pathogens than by changes in sanitary conditions or poverty. Mortality patterns amongst young adult migrants were affected by a shift from acute to chronic infectious diseases over the period.

"than by changes in sanitary conditions or poverty" [my emphasis]

But wait! there's more! from the same study:

> The available evidence indicates a decline in urban mortality in the period c.1750-1820, especially amongst infants and (probably) rural-urban migrants.

"especially amongst infants and (probably) rural-urban migrants" ...where is the industrial revolution here?

And if that was not enough:

>Mortality at ages 1-4 years demonstrated a more complex pattern, falling between 1750 and 1830 before rising abruptly in the mid-nineteenth century.

"rising abruptly in the mid-nineteenth century"

turns out industrial revolution did in fact raise mortality and death rates

you might want to brush up on the short and medium consequences of the industrial revolution and the dark satanic mills where children were maimed or where people worked for 12h a day in horrendous conditions.

Do you think because 2 dev are now super productive with AI, the company will keep the other average 30 devs? no, of course not, they will fire and pocket the difference. Same for other industries, where AI will slowly diffuse like a poisonous gas and displace jobs and people, leaving behind a crippled white collar class. The profits will not trickle down and the increased productivity will be a hatchet, not a plough.

>Why is the reaction of so many people, once their menial work gets automated, "oh no, my menial work is automated." Why is it not "sweet, now I can do bigger/better/more ambitious things?"

because i have rent to pay? old age to prepare for?

why is it so hard to understand most people are not rich, that the cost of living is high, and that most people are VERY afraid their jobs will be automated away? why is so hard to understand that most people haven't worked at FAANG, they don't have stocks or savings, and are squeezed harder with every new day and every new war?

what world, what reality are you guys living in?!

> Why is it an apocalypse if people don't have jobs anymore?

because i need to pay rent? eat? not die naked in ditch when i'm old?

come back home Delphi 7, all is forgiven

>And given the Southport riots were, well riots, it’s unsurprising they were dealt with harshly.

you didn't read or care to understand my argument at all, which is not about the target of the process, but the existence of the process and the process itself. Looks like I have to spell it out: next time won't be race rioters, next time will be protesters protesting the farage gov crackdown on immigrants and minorities.

>It’s not especially surprising that there is a high rate of arrests in the subcategory of protests they picked

the article mentions the rate of arrests is high COMPARED with other countries. And again you're getting lost in the details; this wasn't about what the protests were about, but the brutal swift crackdown AND the laws passed giving police more powers.

Yes, this time they hit your out-group, so all is well. fine. next time, (and this is the crux of my argument), _using the exact same tools_, it's your group, you, that will be targeted.

I meant the way it deal with the southport rioters (no judgement value on the riot itself or its reasons, just noticing how the uk gov dealt with the it)

For example:

>Courts will sit for 24 hours to fast-track sentencing under government plans to crack down on far-Right riots that swept Britain on Saturday.[1]

[1]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/08/03/courts-open-24-h...

There is also this:

>Only Australia arrested climate and environmental protesters at a higher rate than UK police. One in five Australian eco-protests led to arrests, compared with about 17% in the UK. The global average rate is 6.7%.

>The UK’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2021 and the Public Order Act 2022 transformed the relationship between protesters and the state, handing police extensive new powers to curtail protests and criminalising a range of protest activities. [2]

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/dec/11/britain-...

Boot, face, forever, etc

Belle du Seigneur by Albert Cohen

The Wonderful Adventures of Nils by Selma Lagerlöf

what wonderful surprises, i thought these amazing books were forgotten and lost

>a hello text every few months, a cup of coffee every few years

sounds like hell to me

UK showed how to deal with civil disobedience (fast tracked judicial process). Hardware attestation will deal with the hacker spirit.

Above all, the LLM panopticon will watch us all.

Technology will not save us. Nothing will save us but ourselves and we're busy making rent and doomscrolling.

yes, that's exactly what you said before. you're not engaging with what i'm saying at all.

> One thing they all had in common was taking a very targeted approach with their search and leveraging their networks

Right, so they applied to a couple of jobs and it worked for them?

I'm sorry, do you understand how uncommon and rare that is? sure, if their domain was REALLY niche and the jobs weren't publicly advertised, then i could see how that would work. but the experience is VASTLY different outside such niche cases

OP was saying the only way to get hired is through work connections

of course if the process doesn't involve networking then we don't have a problem, we agree on that

> I have work connections.

> It isn't hard.

you're not an introvert then

so you either are well connected or you starve, got it

guess it's death and destitute for introverts

edit: please explain the downvotes, i'm curious why you think i'm wrong

if what op says it's true, that today only networking works, then it easily follows that if for some reasons you do not have a network then you don't get hired

tbf, less flagged posts hitting /active lately

either they kill them early (delete them) or hn policy quietly changed

do the following:

sample content from users on this page: https://news.ycombinator.com/leaders

and ask the LLM to rephrase it in their voice

funnily enough, if everyone did this (at least make a new account often), it would prove more destructive to what HN (purposefully) wants to do than deleting the occasional account data

I mean, just because they say the comments are not PI doesn't make it so.